[Bibliographic medical research using MEDLINE-PubMed. A practical approach based on examples]

“Não” para jovens bombados, “sim” para velhos empinados: o discurso sobre anabolizantes e saúde em artigos da área biomédica

Abordamos o discurso médico sobre o uso dos esteroides anabolizantes androgênicos (EAA), drogas sintéticas cujo abuso vem sendo caracterizado como problema de saúde pública, sendo operado na contraposição entre usos “médicos” e “não-médicos”. Com base em abordagem qualitativa, realizamos análise de enunciações presentes em 76 artigos da área biomédica entre 2002 e 2012. Nesse discurso, permanece o banimento, entre jovens, de usos de EAA não regulados pela medicina, ao passo em que as fronteiras do emprego clinicamente qualificado parecem se expandir para pessoas idosas, mesmo frente a contradições que tensionam o argumento de prevenção dos riscos à saúde. Percebem-se marcações biopolíticas moralizantes, seja via distinções de gênero, seja sob o signo da criminalização do uso de drogas.

Testing search strategies for systematic reviews in the Medline literature database through PubMed

BACKGROUND

A high-quality electronic search is essential in ensuring accuracy and completeness in retrieved records for the conducting of a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

We analysed the available sample of search strategies to identify the best method for searching in Medline through PubMed, considering the use or not of parenthesis, double quotation marks, truncation and use of a simple search or search history.

METHODS

In our cross-sectional study of search strategies, we selected and analysed the available searches performed during evidence-based medicine classes and in systematic reviews conducted in the Botucatu Medical School, UNESP, Brazil.

RESULTS

We analysed 120 search strategies. With regard to the use of phrase searches with parenthesis, there was no difference between the results with and without parenthesis and simple searches or search history tools in 100% of the sample analysed (P = 1.0). The number of results retrieved by the searches analysed was smaller using double quotations marks and using truncation compared with the standard strategy (P = 0.04 and P = 0.08, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no need to use phrase-searching parenthesis to retrieve studies; however, we recommend the use of double quotation marks when an investigator attempts to retrieve articles in which a term appears to be exactly the same as what was proposed in the search form. Furthermore, we do not recommend the use of truncation in search strategies in the Medline via PubMed. Although the results of simple searches or search history tools were the same, we recommend using the latter.